WE WINCE whenever the Bay Area Toll Authority makes news. The agency’s logo should be an outstretched hand reaching from the Bay Bridge into our pockets.

So the recent report that it plans to increase bridge tolls in July — this time it’s for seismic retrofits on the Dumbarton and Antioch bridges — hardly qualifies as a surprise. There is always some justification for ringing the cash register. The only question is how it will be done.

Three alternative pricing plans are under the microscope, and we have a sneaking suspicion you won’t like any of them.

No. 3: The same as option No. 1, except for the poor saps on the Bay Bridge, who will be charged $6 during “congestion” time — the hours when they’re driving to and from work.

“We’re between a rock and hard place,” said Orinda Councilwoman Amy Worth, a representative on the toll authority. “Traffic volume is down, the cost of borrowing is up, and we have to find a way to pay for this retrofit project.”

Contra Costa County Supervisor Federal Glover, a fellow member of the authority, concurs.

“I’m never in favor of raising tolls,” he said, “but this is a necessary one. We need to do retrofits — I think a prime example of that is (the emergency repair) we just experienced on the Bay Bridge.”

It’s difficult to deny the logic in making bridge users pay for bridge retrofits. But the pros and cons of the three options will make for a lively debate at public hearings in the months ahead.

“I think they should continue to reward carpoolers,” said Sharon Morris, of Pleasanton, noting that ride-sharing reduces traffic and wear and tear on roads. “I’m for option 2 — zero carpool fees. If you have more drivers, the roads could get worse.”

“I don’t like the idea of sticking it to anybody during peak hours,” he said. “That’s when we’re forced to travel. It’s not like I have an option. I have to be at work the same time every day.”

David Rolley, who carpools from Fairfield to Martinez, said it’s difficult enough to keep a group of riders together without reducing the financial incentive. Besides, he said, the bureaucrats in charge of tolls have treated price hikes like an addiction. The last one was in 2007, the one before in 2004.

“I remember when the toll was 50 cents, then $1, then $2,” he said. “It seems like the price has gone up much faster than inflation.”

That’s because it has.

As recently as 1989, the Bay Bridge toll was $1. Adjusting for inflation, that would be $1.74 today. In 1997, the toll was $2. In today’s dollars, that’s $2.69.

Our bridges may not have kept pace with engineering advances, but our tolls have run rings around inflation.

Interestingly — or perturbedly — this was not the original plan. When the Bay Bridge opened in 1936, tolls were to be charged only until the bridge was paid off, as Time magazine reported: “Experts predict that tolls will amortize the bridge’s cost in 20 years.”

That reminds us of an old gag that you may have heard before: I’ve got a bridge I’d like to sell you.

More in News

Austin Evers, executive director of the liberal watchdog group American Oversight, whose record requests sparked the White House discovery, said it strained credulity that Trump's daughter did not know that government officials should not use private emails for official business.

Click here if you are unable to view this gallery on a mobile device.Almost immediately after the Camp Fire roared through the town of Paradise, destroying most of the homes and businesses of the 26,000 people who lived there, evacuees began pitching tents in the parking lot of Walmart, down the hill in Chico.It also became a place for people...

The White House's move to restore Acosta's pass, announced in a letter to the news network, appeared to be a capitulation to CNN in its brief legal fight against the administration. White House officials had suspended Acosta's White House press pass following a contentious news conference on Nov. 7, prompting CNN to sue last week to force the administration to...